Dawn L Hershman1, Jason D Wright, Emerson Lim, Donna L Buono, Wei Yann Tsai, Alfred I Neugut. 1. Dawn L. Hershman, Jason D. Wright, Emerson Lim, Donna L. Buono, Wei Yann Tsai, and Alfred I. Neugut, Columbia University; and Dawn L. Hershman, Jason D. Wright, Emerson Lim, and Alfred I. Neugut, New York Presbyterian Hospital, New York, NY.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Drugs are approved on the basis of randomized trials conducted in selected populations. However, once approved, these treatments are usually expanded to patients ineligible for the trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used the SEER-Medicare database to identify subjects older than 65 years with metastatic breast, lung, and colon cancer, diagnosed between 2004 and 2007 and undergoing follow-up to 2009, who received bevacizumab. We defined a contraindication as having at least two billing claims before bevacizumab for thrombosis, cardiac disease, stroke, hemorrhage, hemoptysis, or GI perforation. We defined toxicity as first development of one of these conditions after therapy. RESULTS: Among 16,085 metastatic patients identified, 3,039 (18.9%) received bevacizumab. Receipt of bevacizumab was associated with white race, later year of diagnosis, tumor type, and decreased comorbid conditions. Of patients who received bevacizumab, 1,082 (35.5%) had a contraindication. In multivariate analysis, receipt of bevacizumab with a contraindication was associated with black race (odds ratio [OR] = 2.6; 95% CI, 1.4 to 4.9), increased age, comorbidity, later year of diagnosis, and lower socioeconomic status. Patients with lung (OR = 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.4) and colon cancer (OR = 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.9) were more likely to have a contraindication. In the group with no contraindication, 30% had a complication after bevacizumab; black patients were more likely to have a complication than were white patients (OR = 1.9; 95% CI, 1.21 to 2.93). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates widespread use of bevacizumab among patients who had contraindications. Black patients were less likely to receive the drug, but those who did were more likely to have a contraindication. Efforts to understand toxicity and efficacy in populations excluded from clinical trials are needed.
PURPOSE: Drugs are approved on the basis of randomized trials conducted in selected populations. However, once approved, these treatments are usually expanded to patients ineligible for the trial. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We used the SEER-Medicare database to identify subjects older than 65 years with metastatic breast, lung, and colon cancer, diagnosed between 2004 and 2007 and undergoing follow-up to 2009, who received bevacizumab. We defined a contraindication as having at least two billing claims before bevacizumab for thrombosis, cardiac disease, stroke, hemorrhage, hemoptysis, or GI perforation. We defined toxicity as first development of one of these conditions after therapy. RESULTS: Among 16,085 metastatic patients identified, 3,039 (18.9%) received bevacizumab. Receipt of bevacizumab was associated with white race, later year of diagnosis, tumor type, and decreased comorbid conditions. Of patients who received bevacizumab, 1,082 (35.5%) had a contraindication. In multivariate analysis, receipt of bevacizumab with a contraindication was associated with black race (odds ratio [OR] = 2.6; 95% CI, 1.4 to 4.9), increased age, comorbidity, later year of diagnosis, and lower socioeconomic status. Patients with lung (OR = 1.7; 95% CI, 1.1 to 2.4) and colon cancer (OR = 1.4; 95% CI, 1.1 to 1.9) were more likely to have a contraindication. In the group with no contraindication, 30% had a complication after bevacizumab; black patients were more likely to have a complication than were white patients (OR = 1.9; 95% CI, 1.21 to 2.93). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates widespread use of bevacizumab among patients who had contraindications. Black patients were less likely to receive the drug, but those who did were more likely to have a contraindication. Efforts to understand toxicity and efficacy in populations excluded from clinical trials are needed.
Authors: Shaheenah Dawood; Asim Jamal Shaikh; Thomas A Buchholz; Javier Cortes; Massimo Cristofanilli; Sudeep Gupta; Ana M Gonzalez-Angulo Journal: Cancer Date: 2011-10-05 Impact factor: 6.860
Authors: Herbert Hurwitz; Louis Fehrenbacher; William Novotny; Thomas Cartwright; John Hainsworth; William Heim; Jordan Berlin; Ari Baron; Susan Griffing; Eric Holmgren; Napoleone Ferrara; Gwen Fyfe; Beth Rogers; Robert Ross; Fairooz Kabbinavar Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2004-06-03 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Arnold L Potosky; Joan L Warren; Elyn R Riedel; Carrie N Klabunde; Craig C Earle; Colin B Begg Journal: Med Care Date: 2002-08 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Jason D Wright; Ana I Tergas; Cande V Ananth; William M Burke; June Y Hou; Ling Chen; Alfred I Neugut; Catherine A Richards; Dawn L Hershman Journal: Cancer Invest Date: 2015-06-12 Impact factor: 2.176
Authors: Nikki M Carroll; Thomas Delate; Alex Menter; Mark C Hornbrook; Lawrence Kushi; Erin J Aiello Bowles; Elizabeth T Loggers; Debra P Ritzwoller Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2015-06-09 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Michael J Hassett; Hajime Uno; Angel M Cronin; Nikki M Carroll; Mark C Hornbrook; Debra Ritzwoller Journal: Med Care Date: 2017-12 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Supriya G Mohile; Arti Hurria; Harvey J Cohen; Julia H Rowland; Corinne R Leach; Neeraj K Arora; Beverly Canin; Hyman B Muss; Allison Magnuson; Marie Flannery; Lisa Lowenstein; Heather G Allore; Karen M Mustian; Wendy Demark-Wahnefried; Martine Extermann; Betty Ferrell; Sharon K Inouye; Stephanie A Studenski; William Dale Journal: Cancer Date: 2016-05-12 Impact factor: 6.860